Savings

If you include local bars and restaurants in your" tourism business owner " umbrella then I agree. I also think it's better for said tourist area to have holiday lets than holiday homes that only get used 2 weeks a year by their wealthy owners yet the government are making it harder for businesses to be viable. Most holiday let's if sold will be snapped up by wealthy people and turned into a holiday home turning most areas into ghost towns. This homes for local people is bollocks. No first time buyer is gonna pay close to half a million for a home near the coast in Anglesey. For one there's hardly any work there.
You're right about houses being snapped up as holiday homes...we've lost quite a few clients who had rentals and they are now holiday homes, a big difference in income for the community in general
Any houses on the market now need to have planning permission to convert to a rental, CGT is to be increased on the sale of rental properties and if we as renters dont reach a 50% utilisation we will be hammered for council tax plus 150%, granted, we, at present, pay business rates which is 100% rebated so we cant really complain if we attain the utilisation figures....thems the rules at present. The government trying to destroy the only growth industry in Wales.
 
You're right about houses being snapped up as holiday homes...we've lost quite a few clients who had rentals and they are now holiday homes, a big difference in income for the community in general
Any houses on the market now need to have planning permission to convert to a rental, CGT is to be increased on the sale of rental properties and if we as renters dont reach a 50% utilisation we will be hammered for council tax plus 150%, granted, we, at present, pay business rates which is 100% rebated so we cant really complain if we attain the utilisation figures....thems the rules at present. The government trying to destroy the only growth industry in Wales.
Are Airbnb classed in that as well as I know they are changing the tax rules on them as well
 
Again, the word Bollocks keeps springing to mind.

I employ 4 girls, one of which runs her own contract cleaners employing 6 staff, we all benefit and make a living from tourists. I buy my supplies and services from local firms, they benefit and make a living. The holiday rental provides an income for a cleaner, a window cleaner, a gardener, a log supplier, the local heating oil supplier, the local waste disposal firm, a handy man, they all benefit. And that is just the first and second layer, below that are the shop keepers, the pub and restaurant owners, the petrol stations, the farms selling farm produce, below that are the tradesmen that provide their services into the tourist trade....builders, roofers, sparkies, plumbers, fisherman, farmers, plus many many other peripheral businesses, all benefit.....
and you're still convinced that the only people who benefit are the owners...bollocks, the whole community benefits and if you cant see that, you have an issue.
Ah the usual vested interest misinformation, all straight out of the tourism industry propaganda booklet... do they issue you with an actual booklet filled with all this pious, self-righteous bullshit when you become a tourism business owner?

As ever full of their own self importance about what an economic saviour tourists and tourism business owners are to local communities whilst simultaneously whining about how tough they've got it and demanding help and support for their "industry". Just a little contradictory perhaps?

All those local non-tourist businesses and tradesmen would still exist without your business, in fact they'd have more income and more regular income from permenant residents, I could give plenty of examples that I know of first hand, here's just one, my local shop says takings actually go DOWN during peak tourist periods because the centre of my village is so gridlocked that nobody, locals or tourists, can pull up and go into the shop.

I know tradesmen who refuse to do business with certain tourism business owners and holiday let owners because they know exactly how they'll be treated by them.

If you think your "girls" on their minimum wage, minimal hours, seasonal jobs are overall better off as a result of tourism and the huge rise in holiday home/holiday let uptake that we've seen in the last few years then you're even more thick and ignorant than you've already demonstrated yourself to be.

I'll say again for the hard of thinking, the socio-economic costs to local communities as a result of tourism far outweigh any of the minimal crumbs of "benefit" in the form of a few exploitative low paid jobs in the sector. All the tourism "industry" does is further exploit any lack of economic opportunities in those areas.

It's amazing how many people do swallow the propaganda, the facts are even in the most heavily infested tourist areas the figures clearly show that the tourism "industry" still only represents a very small fraction in terms of providing employment, GVA and any other economic metric you look at it. The "industry" just happens to have a very vocal and vociferous lobby group promoting and wildly exaggerating its own economic importance to the communities that it parasitises.
 
I actually encourage the increase in stamp duty on second homes as anything that makes housing more affordable for young people is a good thing. The big worry is if businesses can afford the Ni hike and increased minimum wage - although again the concept of an increased minimum wage seems inherently fair.

The big issue for me as ever which is the elephant In the room is labours link to the unions which sees the public sector burden grow and the ongoing issue of disparity between pensions in the public sector and the private sector.

But let’s see.
 
Ah the usual vested interest misinformation, all straight out of the tourism industry propaganda booklet... do they issue you with an actual booklet filled with all this pious, self-righteous bullshit when you become a tourism business owner?

As ever full of their own self importance about what an economic saviour tourists and tourism business owners are to local communities whilst simultaneously whining about how tough they've got it and demanding help and support for their "industry". Just a little contradictory perhaps?

All those local non-tourist businesses and tradesmen would still exist without your business, in fact they'd have more income and more regular income from permenant residents, I could give plenty of examples that I know of first hand, here's just one, my local shop says takings actually go DOWN during peak tourist periods because the centre of my village is so gridlocked that nobody, locals or tourists, can pull up and go into the shop.

I know tradesmen who refuse to do business with certain tourism business owners and holiday let owners because they know exactly how they'll be treated by them.

If you think your "girls" on their minimum wage, minimal hours, seasonal jobs are overall better off as a result of tourism and the huge rise in holiday home/holiday let uptake that we've seen in the last few years then you're even more thick and ignorant than you've already demonstrated yourself to be.

I'll say again for the hard of thinking, the socio-economic costs to local communities as a result of tourism far outweigh any of the minimal crumbs of "benefit" in the form of a few exploitative low paid jobs in the sector. All the tourism "industry" does is further exploit any lack of economic opportunities in those areas.

It's amazing how many people do swallow the propaganda, the facts are even in the most heavily infested tourist areas the figures clearly show that the tourism "industry" still only represents a very small fraction in terms of providing employment, GVA and any other economic metric you look at it. The "industry" just happens to have a very vocal and vociferous lobby group promoting and wildly exaggerating its own economic importance to the communities that it parasitises.
I gave up after the first paragraph
 
I actually encourage the increase in stamp duty on second homes as anything that makes housing more affordable for young people is a good thing. The big worry is if businesses can afford the Ni hike and increased minimum wage - although again the concept of an increased minimum wage seems inherently fair.

The big issue for me as ever which is the elephant In the room is labours link to the unions which sees the public sector burden grow and the ongoing issue of disparity between pensions in the public sector and the private sector.

But let’s see.
Then why don’t the private sector do something about their pensions? Why should the public sector reduce because the private sector don’t do enough? Again I look at the profit these huge companies make and I’m talking billions in the case of banks etc, why arent their employees getting better pensions. A friend of mines daughter just got a £5k bonus for beating her sales targets, I don’t know of any public sector worker who gets a bonus, maybe we should introduce that into the public sector, oh wait then we’d say why should they get bonuses for doing their job! Maybe instead of getting a bonus they should put that in her pension, she may have that choice but I bet as a 26 year old she won’t do it. The public sector pensions were reformed in 2006 by Labour!
 
Still cannot get my head around why so many voted Labour. The majority of people knew this was coming and whilst the whole system is a complete circus at this point, Rishi Sunak was correct in his last attempt in advising people to not vote labour just because you want conservatives out. To answer your question...waiting.

Possibly because some people vote for a government not solely based on whether they’ll personally be very slightly richer or poorer if they win?
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.